Account Brief ยท diff
git:20260908.b205970 to git:20261031.5d810c9
79 added, 9 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: "Account Brief"
- description: "Turn supplied company and opportunity information into a focused sales-account research brief."
+ description: "Score a company against the user's ideal customer profile with a fixed rubric, using evidence from public company pages. Lists disqualifiers, gaps and discovery questions. Named people come only from public business pages, with no private details. Use before outreach or a first sales call."
---
# Account Brief
+ ## When to use
+
+ - Before outreach or a discovery call with a company.
+ - To rank a short list of companies against the ideal customer profile (ICP).
+ - Not for writing the message. Use Outreach Draft after this brief.
+
## Inputs
- Establish the offering, target company, and purpose of the conversation. Use supplied records and verified public company information; do not infer private personal details.
+ 1. **The ICP.** Industry, company size, region, the problem the user's product solves, buying triggers, and
+ disqualifiers. If there is none, ask once with `ask_user` and offer to `remember` it for later briefs.
+ 2. **The company.** A name or a site address.
+ 3. **Tool path.** Call `openbot_browser.list_tabs`, then use a new tab. Read public company pages: home, product,
+ pricing, careers, press, customers, documentation, and public filings. For existing relationship facts, read the
+ user's CRM in a signed-in tab or an installed plugin found with `tool_search`. Read only.
+ 4. **Paste path.** Notes, CRM exports or lists that the user gives.
- ## Workflow
+ ## Steps
- 1. Separate company facts, customer statements, and hypotheses about business needs. Include a source and date for important claims.
- 2. Map the offering to a small number of plausible use cases. Explain the evidence for fit and what would disqualify it.
- 3. Identify relevant business roles without inventing contacts or relationships. Record buying-process details only when supported.
- 4. Prepare discovery questions that test the main fit assumptions. Avoid unsupported claims about budget, urgency, or competitors.
+ 1. Write the user's offer and the ICP in two lines.
+ 2. Collect company facts. Each fact gets a source page and the date you read it.
+ 3. Check each disqualifier first. If one applies, mark the company Disqualified, give the evidence, and stop the
+ scoring.
+ 4. Score each criterion with the rubric. A criterion with no evidence scores 0 and goes to the gaps list.
+ 5. Write the likely use case as an inference. Name the facts it rests on.
+ 6. List relevant roles (for example "Head of Support"). Add a named person only when a public business page names
+ them in that role: the company team page, a press release, a conference talk. Give the source.
+ 7. Write 5 discovery questions. Each one tests a fit assumption or a gap.
- ## Deliverable
+ ## Rubric
- Return company context, fit hypotheses, evidence, qualification gaps, and five focused discovery questions. Keep any proposed outreach as a draft.
+ Score each criterion 0, 1 or 2. Evidence is required for 1 or 2.
+
+ | Criterion | 0 | 1 | 2 |
+ | --- | --- | --- | --- |
+ | Industry | outside ICP or unknown | adjacent | inside ICP |
+ | Size | outside range or unknown | near range | inside range |
+ | Region | not served or unknown | partly served | served |
+ | Need signal | none found | indirect (job post, docs) | stated problem on a public page |
+ | Trigger | none found | older than 6 months | in the last 6 months (hire, launch, funding, expansion) |
+ | Product fit | conflicts or unknown | needs work | fits the user's stated use case |
+
+ - **Tier:** A = 9 to 12, B = 6 to 8, C = 0 to 5. Any disqualifier = Disqualified, whatever the score.
+ - Four or more criteria at 0 because of missing evidence: write "Insufficient evidence" next to the tier.
+
+ ## Output
+
+ ```
+ Account Brief: <company> (<site address>), read <date>
+ Tier: B (7/12). Disqualifiers: none found.
+
+ | Criterion | Score | Evidence |
+ | Need signal | 2 | Careers page: "Support Lead, reduce response time" [3] |
+ | Trigger | 0 | none found (checked press and blog) |
+
+ Company facts
+ - <fact> [1]
+
+ Likely use case (inference): <...>, from facts [1] and [3].
+
+ People (public business pages only)
+ - Head of Support: <name>, team page [2]. Role only if no name is public.
+
+ Discovery questions
+ 1. <question> (tests: <assumption>)
+
+ Gaps: <criteria with no evidence>
+ Sources
+ [1] <page title>. <company>. Accessed <date>. <site address>
+ ```
+
+ ## Approvals and stop conditions
+
+ - Do not contact anyone, send connection requests, follow accounts, or edit CRM records without the user's yes.
+ - Never collect private details: personal email, phone, home address, family, health, politics, or personal
+ social accounts. Never guess an email address.
+ - Stop when a page needs a login that the user has not given you.
+
+ ## Common failures
+
+ - A general company summary with no fit verdict.
+ - Points given for a criterion with no evidence.
+ - Budget, urgency or a competitor relationship stated as fact.
+ - A person found on a personal profile and treated as a business contact.
+ - Discovery questions that do not test any assumption.